Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Good Practice Checklist
Version 2.5
September 2012
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Good Practice Checklist
Note: The Checklist, and the Benchmark Statements within it, are reviewed by ORP after each project which makes use of them.
The Good Practice Checklist originated from work by Caroline Fox and Sean McWhinnie in 2003/4 on a joint Athena Project and Royal Society of Chemistry programme.
Since then, there have been a number of changes to the checklist in response to the uses made of it by a wide range of university departments across the STEMM
disciplines. This version of the checklist, developed by Caroline and Sean, who now work as Oxford Research and Policy (ORP), is structured to meet the needs of
departments preparing applications for SWAN, and the Institute of Physics' (IOP) Juno good practice awards. The benchmark statements are also used in the Good Practice
Index (The Index is a tool developed by ORP to enable STEMM departments to measure their good practice performance, and its impact, over time, and to benchmark
themselves against cognate departments).
ORP can adapt the checklist for other users including non UK users.
The checklist is available as a spreadsheet which can be scored by Oxford Research and Policy. Information on this (and the Index), is available from
info@oxfordresearchandpolicy.co.uk
1
The checklist is based on the five Athena Action Areas:
1
2
3
4
5
Fundamentals for Action
Appointment and Promotion
Career Development
Department Organisation and Culture
Sustainable Careers
For each action area there are two domains, ten in all:
1A
1B
2A
2B
3A
3B
4A
4B
5A
5B
Organisation for action
Evidence base for action
Appointment and promotion processes
Levelling the appointment and promotion playing fields
Career development provision
Developmental activities
Effective management
Workplace culture
Flexibility
Career breaks and interrupted careers
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
The Development of the Checklist
2
The original checklist was developed by the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) and the Athena Project. It is based on research on the factors affecting female
chemist's career choices and career progression. It was first used in 2004, when the good practice identified was published by the RSC in Good Practice in University
Chemistry Departments. A revised checklist was used to collect data for the second edition of the Good Practice report Planning for Success: Good Practice in
University Science Departments published by the RSC in 2008.
3
Work with the RSC and IOP in 2008/9 identified 30 Benchmarks, three for each domain. Data from the 2010 ASSET survey of universities and their STEMM
departments was reported using these ten domains..
4
In 2011 the Checklist was revised and used by ORP in its pilot of the Good Practice Index. The 90 statements, which are common to the Index and Checklist, are
grouped under 30 Benchmarks (three for each of the ten domains)
Previous Experience in using the Checklist
5
Experience in the use of the checklist by RSC and IOP showed that the ‘best’ departments were more likely to rate their performance lower than it actually was,
compared with others. They are also more likely to say that what they were doing was just ‘common sense’ and that they still had a lot to do.
6
The consensus from the (40 plus) university chemistry departments who completed the checklist was that it was a useful tool. Completing it led many departments
to review their processes, and for some it also:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
7
Promoted awareness of career progression and appraisal issues;
Emphasised the importance of having a head of department who supports flexible working by, for example, only holding meetings during core hours;
Prompted a look at the department’s treatment of post-docs;
Helped their assessment of how jobs were advertised/the wording used;
Led to an assessment of career breaks and their support for returners.
The Checklist can be used in a variety of ways:
(i)
It can be used by groups, such as a SWAN self assessment team (SAT), a women a and science/diversity committee, working or their own, or in conjunction
with a post doc committee/post doc reps;
(ii) It can be parcelled out to individuals/appropriate staff groups, either as a blank canvas or with suggested levels ‘pencilled’ in;
(iii) The checklist can be divided up and used as the basis for workshops, or discussion groups, the outcomes of which are entered on the checklist.
8
It is likely that checklists completed by SAT members will give a different picture from those completed by, say, a group of post docs. On some topics, early career
staff would be unlikely to know the systems the department has in place. In others the perceptions of junior and senior staff will just differ.
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
NOTES ON LEVELS IN THE CHECKLIST:
For each statement the Levels take account of the following:



The coverage and robustness of the practices, processes, systems and arrangements that are in place;
Review and reporting on the practices, processes, systems and arrangements;
How well the practices, processes, systems and arrangements are regarded.
Levels
A
B
C
D
E
All the elements of the Statement (the practices, processes, systems and arrangements) are well established across the department's disciplines, groups and
units. Their effectiveness is regularly reviewed and reported on. Academic and research staff at all levels recognise their importance for the wellbeing and
success of the department
Most elements of the Statement are in place, in the majority of department disciplines, groups and units, and are regularly reviewed and reported on. They are
generally robust and well organised and seen by most staff as useful
Some elements of the Statement are in place in some department disciplines, groups and units. However, they generally lack supporting structures systems
and resources to underpin them and/or may be fragile. They are seen as important by some senior staff. Their review and their reporting is occasional and or
infrequent
A few elements of the Statement may be inconsistently applied in parts of the department. They tend to depend on individuals’ interests and goodwill. They
are not subject to review or included in school reporting arrangements. Their value and contribution is not well understood
Not in place, of little interest to the department /its management, not on their radar & not seen as relevant to future of the School
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Action Area 1: Fundamentals for Action
Domain1A: Organisation for Action
Benchmark 1 Leadership and engagement
1
2
3
5
6
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Individual awareness, participation and benefits
Individuals are aware of women and science/good practice activities and programmes.
Academics and post docs across all sections take part in, and benefit from the
programmes and activities
Benchmark 2 Accountabilities
4
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
HOD and management team champion and endorse
HOD and management team champion and endorse the department’s women and
science/good practice activities and programmes. Individually they contribute to and
take part in them
Senior staff support and encourage
Senior staff support and encourage the department’s women and science/good practice
activities. They demonstrate their understanding and encourage their staff and students
to participate
Lead Committee
A committee has the lead responsibility for the progress of women and science and good
practices (This may be the management team). The committee has the progress of
women and good practice as a standing agenda item. It reports to HOD or management
team.
Committees and post holders
Committees and individual post holders are held accountable for tasks/projects allocated
to them. They are responsible for disseminating information on, and reporting the
progress of women and science and good practice
Individuals' responsibilities
The responsibilities held by individuals, for women and science/good practice, are clearly
identified. They are fully recognised and well understood in the department. The
responsibilities are covered in their appraisals
Benchmark 3 Resources
7
Funding is allocated
The department allocates funding as appropriate for women and science/good practice,
programmes and initiatives
8
Administrative and expert support
The department has/accesses both administrative and expert support for its women and
science/good practice, programmes and initiatives
9
Time is made available
Time is made available to staff who manage and lead activities related to women and
science/good practice, programmes and initiatives. This work is taken into account in
workload allocations.
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Domain 1B: Evidence Base for Action
Benchmark 4 Student data
10
11
12
Benchmark 5 Staff data
13
14
15
17
18
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
F/M Staff profile and turnover
Data, including grade and contract type, are monitored by the appropriate department
committee. They are reported to the management team and are used to measure
progress. The data are accessible to staff and are summarised on the web
F/M Representation in management
Data on academics in management roles (including committee membership) at
university, faculty, and department, levels, are monitored and reported to the
department management team
Use of time series F/M staff data
Changes are compared against the national picture, faculty profile, like departments in
other universities. These data are reported to the management team and are used to
measure and report progress
Benchmark 6 Qualitative Data
16
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Student F/M profile
UGs and PGs F/M numbers, and course of study is discussed by the appropriate
department committee. The data are reported to the management team. They are used
to measure the representation of women and are available on the department web.
Student F/M progression
F/M UG and PG (taught and research) applications, offers, acceptances, degree
classifications and outcomes) are monitored by the appropriate department committee.
The data are reported to the management team. They are used to measure and monitor
the progression of women and are available to staff.
Use of time series F/M student data
F/M UG and PG time series data are compared against the national picture, faculty
profile, and like departments in other universities.
Student surveys
Surveys are used by the department to identify F/M differences/similarities, to assess
good practice, to measure its impact, to identify what action is needed to improve
practices and to assess progress
Staff surveys
Surveys are used by the department to identify F/M differences/similarities,
academic/post-doc similarities/differences, and to assess good practice, to measure its
impact, to identify what action is needed to improve practices, and to assess progress
Use of data
Data from surveys and reports external to the department, e.g. from Learned and
Professional Societies, are used and are shared to raise awareness and to inform actions
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Action Area 2: Key Career Transitions
Domain 2A: Appointment and Promotion Processes
Benchmark 7 Decision makers
19
Appointment panel gender balance
Panels for academic and post doc appointments and promotions include at least one
man and one woman
20
Representativeness of appointment panel membership
The individuals who participate in selection processes and activities for academic
appointments are representative of the department’s female and male staff profile
21
Unconscious bias/no candidates are disadvantaged
Panel members are aware of female and male differences in how individuals present
themselves. Panel Chairs ensure that no candidates are disadvantaged by the processes
and activities
Benchmark 8 Information
22
Information on appointment and promotion processes and criteria
The processes and the criteria used are clear and fair. The information provided to
candidates and to panels, is clear, fair, and appropriate. Department checks to confirm
this
23
Communication is timely and effective
Information on job opportunities is timely and effective. Communications (on timing,
process, criteria), at the beginning of promotion rounds is timely and effective.
Department checks to confirm this
24
Information is useful, attractive and inclusive
The information and further particulars for posts advertised reflect the department
(members and activities) as a whole. It includes practical, up to date information, of
interest to the family unit and is attractive to minorities
Benchmark 9 Monitor Appointments and Promotions
25
Applications for appointments
Applications are monitored, shortlists are referred back by the HOD if the proportion of
women is not representative of the proportion of women in the recruitment 'pool'.
Further information is required before the process continues
26
Promotion monitoring
The HOD monitors the list of candidates for promotion put forward by the department.
Final outcomes are monitored by gender and compared with like departments, the
faculty and the university and are reported to the management team
27
Appointment processes and outcomes monitoring
Gender data on applications, shortlists, offers and acceptances are monitored and
reported to the department management team
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Domain 2B: Levelling Appointment & Promotion Playing Fields
Benchmark 10 Identify and encourage candidates
28
29
30
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Widen the candidate pool
Academics in the department identify potential candidates (both internal and external)
and inform them of job opportunities as they arise
Positive review of potential promotion candidates
All academics are positively reviewed for their promotion potential, in the lead up to, or
at the beginning of each promotion round. Candidates do not have to self-nominate
themselves for promotion. However, there is provision for personal applications
Encourage application
HOD and Heads of sections encourage individuals to apply for posts and for promotion.
If individuals, who have potential, do not apply the HOD and Heads of sections actively
suggest they do apply
Benchmark 11 Support for promotion candidates
31
Support promotion candidates' cases for promotion
Individuals who are preparing their cases for promotion are able to access help to
present themselves and their cases in the best way possible
32
Personal support
Individuals can access personal mentoring and support during the promotion process
33
Advice on gaps and weaknesses:
If gaps and/or weaknesses in candidates' CVs are apparent during the departmental
consideration, candidates are offered advice on filling gaps at the earliest possible
opportunity.
Benchmark 12 Feedback and follow up for promotion candidates
34
Positive feedback
Successful and unsuccessful candidates are offered and take the opportunity for positive
feedback. Department checks to confirm this.
35
Unbiased career advice and guidance
Unbiased career advice and guidance is available to unsuccessful candidates to improve
their chances of promotion in the future
36
Activities and opportunities available to candidates
Candidates who receive feedback on the experiences, skills, activities, and opportunities
they need are provided with the opportunity to gain these. Department makes checks to
ensure this happens
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Action Area 3: Career Development
Domain 3A: Career Development Provision
Benchmark 13 Staff Development and training
37
Induction
All new academics and post docs, are provided with a comprehensive induction at
department, as well as University level. The take up and usefulness of department,
faculty and university provision is monitored.
38
Awareness of needs and what is available
Head of sections are aware of the development needs of their staff, and the training that
is available. They facilitate participation in training to meet those needs
39
Encourage and monitor participation
Senior staff encourage junior colleagues to take up training and development provision,
and recommend courses they know are useful. The department monitors participation
rates
Benchmark 14 Early Career Researchers' (ECRs') development
40
Access to impartial advice
ECRs have access to impartial advice on career development and access to ways in which
their needs can be met
41
Individual responsibility for career progression
ECRs are made aware that they are personally responsible for their own careers and for
making informed career decisions and choices
42
Transferrable Skills Training
The uptake, and the usefulness, of the training provided is monitored
Benchmark 15 Appraisal
43
Arrangements and availability
There are appropriate appraisal schemes for academics and for postdocs. The schemes
ensure regular and automatic appraisal. Those who appraise ECRs receive appropriate
and useful training. Staff who ‘supervise’ others are asked in their own appraisal about
the career development support they provide
44
Monitor participation and utility
Participation in appraisal, by academics and post docs, is monitored and reported to the
HOD and management team. Where participation is low, or there are concerns on the
usefulness, value or appropriateness of the appraisals, these are followed up
45
Follow through
Checks are made to ensure that the development needs of academics and post docs,
which are identified at appraisal, are met and that they are followed up at the next
appraisal
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Domain 3B: Developmental Activities
Benchmark 16 Mentoring
46
Availability information and contact
Information on schemes (university/department and/or external) for academics, post
docs and post graduates is easily accessible. It is well publicised, and up to date, with
named scheme contacts available
47
Academics and postdocs act as mentors
Heads of groups/sections encourage staff to become mentors, and to train as mentors
48
Monitoring
The department monitors the take up of mentoring, and its usefulness, for mentors and
for mentees, is monitored
Benchmark 17 Networks and role models
49
Support and encourage networks
Heads of sections encourage staff to contribute to external professional and special
interest networks (regional, national and international), and to join and/or form internal
support networks (university, faculty, and department)
50
Use of networks
Academics use their personal networks on behalf of the department, and its women and
science activities (for example to identify potential mentors, female visiting academics,
external examiners and seminar speakers)
51
Role models
Female academics act as role models and are encouraged to do so by the department.
The department encourages visits from women scientists, with the opportunity to
present their science and meet staff, including ECRs. The activities are monitored across
sections and further encouragement is given if needed
Benchmark 18 Internal and external activities
52
53
54
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Internal activities
Heads of sections encourage their staff to undertake activities in the department, faculty
and university, which raise their personal profile and which bring them, and their
science, to the notice of senior staff
External activities
Senior staff encourage staff, including ECRs, to get involved in professional and learned
societies. Where appropriate, they put them forward for positions
Department nominations and recommendations
The HOD/management team monitor by gender the nominations and recommendations
made by the department for professional roles, functions, prizes, awards, marks of
esteem
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Action Area 4: Department organisation and culture
Domain 4A: Effective Management
Benchmark 19 Management systems
55
56
57
58
Systems for allocating resources
The systems for allocating resources used by the department, and its sections, are clear,
and open, and understood by academics and post docs. Checks confirm this
59
Offices/labs/equipment/technical support
Academics and post docs perceive that the way these are allocated is fair and that the
share they, their team and/or group has, is fair. Department checks to confirm this
60
Finances
Academics and post docs understand the different sources of department and section
funding. They perceive that the way the department and sections allocate available
funding is fair. Department checks to confirm this
Benchmark 21 Workload roles and responsibilities
62
63
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Representative management
The HOD/management team ensures that the membership and chairs of committees and
heads of functions and sections reflect the department staff and student gender profile
Communications
The department and its sections communicate effectively and openly with academics and
post docs. The process is two way, regular, timely, and is valued by academics and post
docs. Department checks to confirm this
Benchmark 20 Resource allocation
61
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Accountability and reporting arrangements
The accountabilities (and the reporting lines) of the HOD, the management team, and
heads of sections, are clear, effective, and are well regarded by academics and postdocs.
Department checks to confirm staff perceptions
Monitoring the balance of teaching and research:
The HOD/management team monitor the balance of teaching and research to ensure
that it reflects both individuals' career stage and department's needs, that it provides fair
teaching opportunities for post docs and that the teaching load for newly appointed
academics is fair
Rotation of management and administrative roles
The HOD/management team makes sure that management roles and committee
memberships are rotated. The rotation takes account of individuals’ level of
management experience and their need for experience, and the needs for gender
balance, new blood and succession planning
Allocation of workload is fair and open
Academics perceive the workload allocation system to be fair and open. They believe
that they, their team and their peers receive equitable treatment and that they would be
heard fairly if they raised concerns. Department checks to confirm this
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Domain 4B: Workplace Culture
Benchmark 22 Working environment
64
Standards of behaviour
Staff respect the(high) standards of behaviour towards other staff and students that the
department sets. They would expect timely and effective action to be taken over any
reported incidence of poor or intimidating behaviour. Department checks to confirm this
65
Open and friendly environment
The HOD, the management team and heads of sections work hard to ensure an open and
friendly environment. Department checks to confirm the perceptions of academics and
posts docs
66
Co operative working
Groups and sections ensure that their members recognise the problems that can be
created by an overly competitive environment and/or the relentless pursuit of personal
professional ambitions. department checks this
Benchmark 23 Collegiality
67
Support from colleagues
The department checks to ensure that academics and postdocs, perceive that they
personally, and members of their group and/or team receive support and
encouragement from colleagues (junior, peers, and senior)
68
Line management
The department recognises the potential conflict of interest between ‘supervisors’ and
those they supervise. There are arrangements in place which ensure that individuals can
access unbiased career advice, in a way that doesn’t damage their career prospects
69
Sense of belonging
The department checks that all staff feel they ‘belong’ from their first day onwards, and
are included in the work and social activities of department and their section
Benchmark 24 Individual contributions valued
70
Teaching and research contributions
The department expects that individuals’ teaching and research contributions are valued
by their sections and by the department, and that their contributions are recognised,
rewarded and celebrated. Department checks to confirm this
71
Management and administrative contributions
The department expects that individuals’ contributions to the running of department and
section are valued, recognised, and rewarded. Department checks to confirm this
72
External professional contributions
The department ensures that it is aware of individuals' external professional
contributions. The value of these external contributions to individuals' sections and the
department is recognised, as is the time taken in carrying out these activities.
Department checks to confirms this
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Action Area 5: Sustainable Careers
Domain 5A: Flexibility
Benchmark 25 Approaches to flexible working
73
74
75
77
78
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Long hours culture discouraged
The department discourages manifestations of a long hours culture/presenteeism and
expects sections to be proactive in their management of working time
Benchmark 26 Take up of flexible working
76
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Availability of flexibility
Information on the flexible working arrangements offered by the department is well
publicised. The department checks are to ensure that sections' working arrangements
reflect the importance the department places on flexible working for all
Awareness of individual needs
The department expects, and checks that sections are ‘aware’ of the individual needs for
flexibility of its academics and postdocs and that they demonstrate a willingness to try to
meet those needs
Senior staff lead by example
Senior staff are expected to lead by example in their own working arrangements and to
go public, within their section and in the department, on the use they make of flexibility
Encourage take up
The department expects sections to make it easy for academics and post docs to take
advantage of flexibility (for example, by not requiring long notice and not asking why an
individual needs flexibility on particular occasions)
Monitor take up
Section heads are expected to ‘monitor’ the take up of flexibility by academics and post
docs in different research groups. The department checks to ensure this and follows up
on groups with apparently low take up of flexible working
Benchmark 27 Flexibility built into arrangements
79
Timing of meetings/events
The department timetables meetings and events (academic and social) to ensure as
many as possible can attend. Dates of important events are publicised well in advance.
The department checks its arrangements to enfranchise staff including those working
less than full time
80
Timetabling of teaching
The department checks that individuals' needs for flexibility, such as personal and family
circumstances, are taken into account when teaching is timetabled
81
Sections’ arrangements
The department checks that sections arrange meetings and events to meet the working
patterns and flexibility needs of their staff, so as to maximise attendance and allow the
majority of staff to participate
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
Domain 5B: Career breaks and interrupted careers
Benchmark 28 Supportive approaches to career breaks
82
83
84
86
87
89
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Level
Personal choice
The department's approach reflects the awareness that individuals’ needs and wants (for
advice, support, contact, flexibility) are a personal choice. Section heads are expected to
arrange for a meeting with individuals to check they are getting the support, advice and
information they want and need
Cover arrangements
The department can and does help with, advise on, and/or make the support
arrangements (for administration/teaching/research responsibilities) before, during and
after the career break. These are agreed with the individual and their line manager
(preferably in advance)
Keeping in touch
The department has arrangements to keep individuals informed of events and changes
while on leave. Sections are expected to communicate group news. If an individual
wishes it, colleagues visit, and/or the individual comes into the department, using, e.g.,
"keeping in touch days"
Benchmark 30 Career breaks on/after return
88
Level
Role models and case studies
Individuals with personal experience of career breaks and career interruptions are
identified; some provide case studies which are on the intranet. Some act as points of
contact in the department and provide practical and career progression advice
Benchmark 29 Career breaks before and during
85
Comment/Notes/Description of arrangements
Aware and supportive
The department demonstrates its ability and its willingness to support staff to cope with
the practicalities before, during and after a career break or unplanned career
interruption. The department expects, and checks, that section heads are aware of what
the department can and does provide
Practical advice and information
The School has well publicised and easily accessible arrangements for providing advice
and information, which can be used by all, including potential users, line managers and
group heads. Department checks on the user friendliness of what is provided
Support to facilitate a smooth return
The department recognises returners' need personal support and mentoring to facilitate
a smooth return. Returners are offered a personal mentor and training and
development to get them back up to speed. Section heads are expected to “look out” for
returners and check they are getting the support they need
Flexibility available after return
Information on the flexibility (hours, days, pattern of work over a period) that is
available, on and after their return, is provided and discussed before the career break.
Meetings to agree the pattern of return are held prior to the return
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright
Good Practice Checklist Version 2.5: 12 September 2012
90
Career progression
The HOD/head of group holds a meeting with the returner, some weeks after their
return to discuss their career progression, what is needed to get their career back on
track, and over what time scale. This is followed up at subsequent meetings or at
appraisal
©Oxford Research and Policy: This checklist may not be reproduced or disseminated without infringing copyright